Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It's time for a North American Union
Fort Worth Star Telegram ^ | Jun. 11, 2006 | By STEVEN HILL Special to The Washington Post

Posted on 06/25/2006 6:41:38 AM PDT by baseball_fan

WASHINGTON - Immigration issues are always ripe for demagoguery, particularly in an election year. But the solution to the very real problems along the U.S.-Mexican border can be found, ironically, in that other part of the world that demagogues love to ridicule: old Europe.

Two years ago, the European Union admitted 10 new members. Like Mexico, all of these nations were poor, some of them fairly backward and most recently ravaged by war and dictatorship.

The leaders of the European Union wisely created policies for fostering regional economic and political integration that make the North American Free Trade Agreement "look timid and halfhearted by comparison," according to Bernd Westphal, consul general of Germany.

Europe realized it had to prevent a "giant sucking sound" of businesses and jobs relocating from the 15 wealthier nations to the 10 poorer ones. It also had to foster prosperity and the spread of a middle class and prevent an influx of poor workers to the richer nations.

So for starters, it gave the new states billions in subsidies to help construct schools, roads, telecommunications and housing, thus making these nations more attractive for business investment. It was expensive, but the result has been a larger economic union in which a rising tide floats all boats.

In return, the 10 poorer nations had to agree to raise their standards on the environment, labor law, health and safety -- and more.

Worker migration is regulated. Immigrants will be carefully integrated so as to cause the least disruption to the developed economies, with the goal of having open borders down the road.

(Excerpt) Read more at dfw.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; americannightmare; americasellsout; barfalert; bendoveramerica; bighermano; bloat; borders; bushielovesfoxie; bushiesellsout; economictreason; endofusasovereignty; globalism; immigrantlist; immigration; lessgovernment; nau; never; nevernever; northamericanunion; noway; sedition; stockpilesong; traitors; vivalarevolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-172 next last
To: Toddsterpatriot

you posted two insults to me. and I am done with you. When the Amero Union is complete I might step back and chuckle a little about your rude comments to me.

In the mean time, I have a life, and I bid you an ADIOS, which will the good bye for the language of this region at that time in the near future. Well at least for 50% of the people here...the rest will be divided up among the numerous languages remaining.


81 posted on 06/25/2006 8:30:14 AM PDT by television is just wrong (our sympathies are misguided with illegal aliens...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: pbrown
Let them talk amongst themselves.

Considering the negligible intelligent content of the conspiracy posts, I'm already talking to myself.

82 posted on 06/25/2006 8:30:29 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: television is just wrong
When the Amero Union is complete I might step back and chuckle a little about your rude comments to me.

And we'll have that Amero by 2009? I'll be sure to point and laugh at you (some more) in 2009.

83 posted on 06/25/2006 8:32:36 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Fertile...thanks.


84 posted on 06/25/2006 8:32:48 AM PDT by processing please hold (If you can't stand behind our military, stand in front of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: pbrown

Always on the lookout for new words. It's like jazz, there is no wrong note. :)


85 posted on 06/25/2006 8:34:21 AM PDT by RightWhale (Off touch and out of base)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You are the kind of buffoon this North American Union wants in its ranks. Just sign on the dotted line that you are oblivious to American sovereignty. Pledge alligence to Mexico


86 posted on 06/25/2006 8:36:56 AM PDT by dennisw (Muhammad and his alter-ego allah need to be discredited)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Sorry Charlie, read post #33.


87 posted on 06/25/2006 8:40:47 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

For once I agree with you.


88 posted on 06/25/2006 8:41:16 AM PDT by texastoo ("trash the treaties")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: texastoo
For once I agree with you.

I'm glad you finally got your head straight :^)

89 posted on 06/25/2006 8:44:28 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Why are protectionists so bad at math?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: texastoo; Toddsterpatriot
For once I agree with you.

Dittos :)

90 posted on 06/25/2006 8:44:30 AM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: baseball_fan



The Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'

by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted May 22, 2006

The idea to form the North American Union as a super-NAFTA knitting together Canada, the United States and Mexico into a super-regional political and economic entity was a key agreement resulting from the March 2005 meeting held at Baylor University in Waco, Tex., between President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin.

A joint statement published by the three presidents following their Baylor University summit announced the formation of an initial entity called, “The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The joint statement termed the SPP a “trilateral partnership” that was aimed at producing a North American security plan as well as providing free market movement of people, capital, and trade across the borders between the three NAFTA partners:

We will establish a common approach to security to protect North America from external threats, prevent and respond to threats within North America, and further streamline the secure and efficient movement of legitimate, low-risk traffic across our borders.

A working agenda was established:

We will establish working parties led by our ministers and secretaries that will consult with stakeholders in our respective countries. These working parties will respond to the priorities of our people and our businesses, and will set specific, measurable, and achievable goals.

The U.S. Department of Commerce has produced a SPP website, which documents how the U.S. has implemented the SPP directive into an extensive working agenda.

Following the March 2005 meeting in Waco, Tex., the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published in May 2005 a task force report titled “Building a North American Community.” We have already documented that this CFR task force report calls for a plan to create by 2010 a redefinition of boundaries such that the primary immigration control will be around the three countries of the North American Union, not between the three countries. We have argued that a likely reason President Bush has not secured our border with Mexico is that the administration is pushing for the establishment of the North American Union.

The North American Union is envisioned to create a super-regional political authority that could override the sovereignty of the United States on immigration policy and trade issues. In his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Pastor, the Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, stated clearly the view that the North American Union would need a super-regional governance board to make sure the United States does not dominate the proposed North American Union once it is formed:

NAFTA has failed to create a partnership because North American governments have not changed the way they deal with one another. Dual bilateralism, driven by U.S. power, continue to govern and irritate. Adding a third party to bilateral disputes vastly increases the chance that rules, not power, will resolve problems.

This trilateral approach should be institutionalized in a new North American Advisory Council. Unlike the sprawling and intrusive European Commission, the Commission or Council should be lean, independent, and advisory, composed of 15 distinguished individuals, 5 from each nation. Its principal purpose should be to prepare a North American agenda for leaders to consider at biannual summits and to monitor the implementation of the resulting agreements.

Pastor was a vice chairman of the CFR task force that produced the report “Building a North American Union.”

Pastor also proposed the creation of a Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment with the view that “a permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law.” The intent is for this North American Union Tribunal would have supremacy over the U.S. Supreme Court on issues affecting the North American Union, to prevent U.S. power from “irritating” and retarding the progress of uniting Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. into a new 21st century super-regional governing body.

Robert Pastor also advises the creation of a North American Parliamentary Group to make sure the U.S. Congress does not impede progress in the envisioned North American Union. He has also called for the creation of a North American Customs and Immigration Service which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security.

Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity. Pastor has also called for the creation of a new currency which he has coined the “Amero,” a currency that is proposed to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar, and the Mexican peso.

If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election. Pursuing any plan that would legalize the conservatively estimated 12 million illegal aliens now in the United States could well spell election disaster for the Republican Party in 2006, especially for the House of Representative where every seat is up for grabs.

Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold StranglehoThe Plan to Replace the Dollar With the 'Amero'

by Jerome R. Corsi
Posted May 22, 2006


The idea to form the North American Union as a super-NAFTA knitting together Canada, the United States and Mexico into a super-regional political and economic entity was a key agreement resulting from the March 2005 meeting held at Baylor University in Waco, Tex., between President Bush, President Fox and Prime Minister Martin.

A joint statement published by the three presidents following their Baylor University summit announced the formation of an initial entity called, “The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” (SPP). The joint statement termed the SPP a “trilateral partnership” that was aimed at producing a North American security plan as well as providing free market movement of people, capital, and trade across the borders between the three NAFTA partners:

We will establish a common approach to security to protect North America from external threats, prevent and respond to threats within North America, and further streamline the secure and efficient movement of legitimate, low-risk traffic across our borders.

A working agenda was established:

We will establish working parties led by our ministers and secretaries that will consult with stakeholders in our respective countries. These working parties will respond to the priorities of our people and our businesses, and will set specific, measurable, and achievable goals.

The U.S. Department of Commerce has produced a SPP website, which documents how the U.S. has implemented the SPP directive into an extensive working agenda.

Following the March 2005 meeting in Waco, Tex., the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published in May 2005 a task force report titled “Building a North American Community.” We have already documented that this CFR task force report calls for a plan to create by 2010 a redefinition of boundaries such that the primary immigration control will be around the three countries of the North American Union, not between the three countries. We have argued that a likely reason President Bush has not secured our border with Mexico is that the administration is pushing for the establishment of the North American Union.

The North American Union is envisioned to create a super-regional political authority that could override the sovereignty of the United States on immigration policy and trade issues. In his June 2005 testimony to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Pastor, the Director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, stated clearly the view that the North American Union would need a super-regional governance board to make sure the United States does not dominate the proposed North American Union once it is formed:

NAFTA has failed to create a partnership because North American governments have not changed the way they deal with one another. Dual bilateralism, driven by U.S. power, continue to govern and irritate. Adding a third party to bilateral disputes vastly increases the chance that rules, not power, will resolve problems.

This trilateral approach should be institutionalized in a new North American Advisory Council. Unlike the sprawling and intrusive European Commission, the Commission or Council should be lean, independent, and advisory, composed of 15 distinguished individuals, 5 from each nation. Its principal purpose should be to prepare a North American agenda for leaders to consider at biannual summits and to monitor the implementation of the resulting agreements.

Pastor was a vice chairman of the CFR task force that produced the report “Building a North American Union.”

Pastor also proposed the creation of a Permanent Tribunal on Trade and Investment with the view that “a permanent court would permit the accumulation of precedent and lay the groundwork for North American business law.” The intent is for this North American Union Tribunal would have supremacy over the U.S. Supreme Court on issues affecting the North American Union, to prevent U.S. power from “irritating” and retarding the progress of uniting Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. into a new 21st century super-regional governing body.

Robert Pastor also advises the creation of a North American Parliamentary Group to make sure the U.S. Congress does not impede progress in the envisioned North American Union. He has also called for the creation of a North American Customs and Immigration Service which would have authority over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security.

Pastor’s 2001 book “Toward a North American Community” called for the creation of a North American Union that would perfect the defects Pastor believes limit the progress of the European Union. Much of Pastor’s thinking appears aimed at limiting the power and sovereignty of the United States as we enter this new super-regional entity. Pastor has also called for the creation of a new currency which he has coined the “Amero,” a currency that is proposed to replace the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar, and the Mexican peso.

If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election. Pursuing any plan that would legalize the conservatively estimated 12 million illegal aliens now in the United States could well spell election disaster for the Republican Party in 2006, especially for the House of Representative where every seat is up for grabs.

Mr. Corsi is the author of several books, including "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry" (along with John O'Neill), "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." He is a frequent guest on the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. He will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project. ld: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil" (along with Craig R. Smith), and "Atomic Iran: How the Terrorist Regime Bought the Bomb and American Politicians." He is a frequent guest on the G. Gordon Liddy radio show. He will soon co-author a new book with Jim Gilchrist on the Minuteman Project.


91 posted on 06/25/2006 8:47:04 AM PDT by television is just wrong (our sympathies are misguided with illegal aliens...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
Re your 'real matrix' series: Are there any worthwhile policy ideas or interests that don't get represented, debated, and decided upon by our citizens?

I'm sometimes surprised at how little consideration is given to the adjustable National Tariff, traditionally the keystone of American trade policy.

Preservation of wildlife species and habitats?

Over-consolidation of agriculture internationally?

92 posted on 06/25/2006 8:49:04 AM PDT by ProCivitas (Qui bono? Quo warranto? ; Who benefits? By what right/authority ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

Joining Mexico and Canada would guarantee democrat rule forever. Forget about it.


93 posted on 06/25/2006 8:53:20 AM PDT by Free Dominoes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Grzegorz 246

Don't countries have to meet certain economic benchmarks before they can join the EU?


94 posted on 06/25/2006 8:59:08 AM PDT by stop_fascism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; hedgetrimmer; Smartass; Czar; calcowgirl

It looks like some were just waiting for this subject. This thead has some very interesting comments.


95 posted on 06/25/2006 8:59:58 AM PDT by texastoo ("trash the treaties")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: baseball_fan; Wilhelm Tell; cripplecreek; freedomfiter2; mo
While our 'leadership community' isn't monolithic and may be fairly fluid, this kind of policy venture raises a more basic concern:

Is our 'leadership community' incompetant and/or untrustworthy?

96 posted on 06/25/2006 9:00:42 AM PDT by ProCivitas (Qui bono? Quo warranto? ; Who benefits? By what right/authority ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility

25 million of Mexico's listed population is likely up here on any given day.


97 posted on 06/25/2006 9:00:53 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: baseball_fan
The Census Bureau predicts that by 2050, the number of Latinos and Asians will triple in the United States and Anglos will make up only 50 percent of the nation's population. For many people, these changes are alarming, but economic disparities guarantee that poor Mexicans will continue seeking entry into El Norte.

The proper term is "white" not Anglo. Anglo is a term designed to obscure the racist nature of modern "immigration" policies.

Of course, what this numbnut doesn't say about the EU is that it is anti-democratic by its very nature. Most of its policies are designed by bureaucrats behind closed doors and what democratic rituals it does display are more show than go. I've said this before, multiracial, multicultural states REQUIRE a centralized police state to keep peace and that is precisely why many of the supporters of such political entities want multiculturalism. The EU also hasn't really solved any of the problems he's mentioned, particularly immigration, quite the opposite. And that's just internal immigration, the flood from Africa and the Mideast continues.

This New [No] America Foundation appears to be a "moderate" Democratic party front organization.

98 posted on 06/25/2006 9:04:21 AM PDT by jordan8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: baseball_fan

"So for starters, it gave the new states billions in subsidies to help construct schools, roads, telecommunications and housing, thus making these nations more attractive for business investment. It was expensive, but the result has been a larger economic union in which a rising tide floats all boats..."




Sounds like this guy is living in an alternate universe.


99 posted on 06/25/2006 9:07:41 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: baseball_fan

Sure to become a talking point of the effeminate,wannabee Euro-elites.


100 posted on 06/25/2006 9:09:34 AM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-172 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson